Last updated on October 14th, 2023 at 11:17 am
Reading Time: 2 minutesThis post is as much for me as anybody else, and I hope it will be a short one. I got myself in a right tizz this morning with numbers and percentages, I know where I went wrong, and now is my attempt to a) set the record straight and b) leave myself a permanent reminder so I don’t make the same mistake again. The Rowley 1000 refers to a specific set of officers, see below.
Anybody who has read a newspaper or watched a news programme in the past few months can’t fail to be aware of the flack that the Metropolitan Police has been taking since the activities of some its officers were made painfully public.
It is neither my place nor intention to even attempt to justify or defend any of those officers, they have no place in any Police Force and deserve to be where they are.
Sadly this has given many of the news outlets and newspapers, plus the usual armchair critics, carte blanche to condemn the Met and just about everybody in it. Following on from the Casey Review the Met Commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, when interviewed, announced that there were 1,000 officers whose individual circumstances would be reviewed to establish whether they should indeed still be a Police Officer.
Well, the exact figures were quoted by Sir Mark in a TV interview this morning. The review examined the circumstances around 1,131 officers, That is out of a total establishment in the region of 34,500 officers (or 3.3%).
246 of the 1,131 will face no further action will be taken, as the original outcome was correct.
689 officers will undergo a new assessment, or vetting, to establish whether there are new, or missed, lines of enquiry.
Finally, 196 officers are of such concern that their continuation with the Met Police will be reassessed. That 196 represents 0.6% of the total number of Police Officers in the Met.
I do not deny that the Met (and probably Policing nationwide) has its problems, but our country is made of 650 law makers. 56 out of 430 male MPs are under some sort of investigation for similarly abusive behaviour. That equates to 13%, so I would dare to suggest that Westminster has a far worse problem, percentage wise, but we never seem to hear that,
Well written as usual. The figures are always bothering me, nice to see something written down we can understand and use in our arguments that the vast majority of officers are good people and don’t deserve the flack they are getting on a daily basis.
Sadly the Commissioner still focussed attention on the minority of bad officers and not supporting the huge majority doing good every day. I don’t see any senior ranks standing up for the frontline troops at all. Why would the rank and file have any faith in their leaders.
Why are they letting the media openly attack the organisation? Why aren’t they defending the good that is done everyday and calling out those responsible for the dismantling of the service. They should also be pointing out that the Mayor has been passive throughout and hasn’t fought for the service he is nominally head of as the police authority. He has totally failed to protect the service and has made the choices on funding and policy and should also be held accountable for his actions.
Thank you Chris, much appreciated. I agree with just about everything you say. The NPCC types only seem to be interested in bring in compulsory degrees and safeguarding their QPM potential. As for the Mayor, it’s always someone else’s fault, he seems to forget, when it suits him, that he is effectively the PCC for the Met.
Not that long ago a high percentage of ACPO / NPCC members were under investigation, though few I expect were prosecuted (I can think of one), others resigned or were sacked and at least one was promoted.
And one has been suspended on full pay for over two years